The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant;

A. The Defendant, as stated in the facts charged of the instant traffic accident, was receiving insurance money from the KIXA insurance company after receiving medical treatment from the KIXA insurance company on account of the injury actually aggravated by the traffic accident, and even though two of the boness of the GIXA had already been removed due to the said traffic accident, the Defendant was guilty of the facts charged of the instant fraud despite the fact that the Defendant reported a false insurance accident as if he were caused by the said traffic accident and received insurance money from the insurance company, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The lower court’s sentence (1.5 million won of a fine) imposed on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. In a case where a defendant files a false insurance accident with intent to acquire insurance money by fraud or intentionally causes an insurance accident, fraud regarding insurance money is established. Furthermore, even if the defendant suffered minor bodily injury due to an accident that could constitute an insurance accident, if he/she is hospitalized in a hospital for a long time and is paid excessive insurance money in comparison with actual damage on the ground of this, it is established a crime of fraud against the whole insurance money.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do17512 Decided February 24, 201, etc.). In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, the Defendant received a proposal from B, which reported the location of the accident to another place after the occurrence of the traffic accident as indicated in the lower judgment, and reported the location and circumstances of the accident to an insurance company by accepting the said proposal under the condition that the occurrence of the accident occurred due to B’s total negligence in collusion with E in a de facto marital relationship, and reported the occurrence of the accident. The Defendant suffered side of the left side of the toilet change before the occurrence of the instant traffic accident.